2011.01.18 01:00 - Solid yet not solid at all

The Guardian for this meeting was Wester Kiranov. The comments are by Wester Kiranov.

For this Being theme session, Pema Pera joined me. After the circle was finished, Alfred Kelberry joined us as well.

But we started with just a two-person chat in Dutch, on the particularities of the Dutch language and culture.

Wester Kiranov: Hoi Piet
Pema Pera: Hallo Wester!
Pema Pera: We zijn dus weer met zijn tweeen he
Pema Pera: (ik weet niet hoe ik de puntjes op de e kan krijgen hier)
Wester Kiranov: ë - hier in SL?
Pema Pera: ah, mooi!
Pema Pera: hoe doe je dat?
Pema Pera: we zijn dus met zijn tweën
Pema Pera: of schrijf je tweëen?
Pema Pera: (ik vergeet dat alles langzamerhand....)
Pema Pera: of twëen?
Wester Kiranov: ah, het is je gelukt. het is tweeën
Pema Pera: dat ziet er vreeeeemd uit :-)
Wester Kiranov: trema na waar je een streepje zou zetten twee-en
Pema Pera: maar de regel is dan om twee te nemen
Pema Pera: ja
Pema Pera: en dan iets erachter, okay
Wester Kiranov: wat dacht je dan van geë-maild? Hadden ze op Nationaal Dictee recentelijk
Pema Pera: oef
Pema Pera: moeilijk!
Pema Pera: heeft email een streepje in het Nederlands? e-mail?
Wester Kiranov: ja, met streepje. ik denk dat het anders teveel op emaille lijkt
Pema Pera: (en als je aan het eieren ben, is he dan geëier?)
Wester Kiranov: helemaal goed.
Pema Pera: enfin, dit is officieel dus weer de vierde van vier Being theme sessies -- ik ben weer bij alle drie vorige geweest, de laatste drie dagen. Was heel interessant!
Pema Pera: we gingen telkens in een cirkel de ronde, en een ieder kon spreken zolang hij/zij maar wou
Wester Kiranov: Ik vind het ook heel leuk dat je zo bezig blijft met ons telkens weer aan het begin zetten. Of aan het eind
Pema Pera: een andere dynamiek dan tijdens de meeste sessies
Pema Pera: haha, ach ja
Pema Pera: ik zet mezelf ook op mijn plek
Pema Pera: en ik ben blij dat jullie meespelen!
Wester Kiranov: Doen we dan nog een spelletje? Kijken hoe dit met z'n tweeën gaat?
Pema Pera: ja, leuk!
Pema Pera: wil jij beginnen?
Pema Pera zoekt naar zijn halmabord
Wester Kiranov: LOL
Pema Pera: zo'n woord dat ik dertig jaar niet gebruikt heb, denk ik :-)
Wester Kiranov: en je kent het nog steeds
Pema Pera: de VS lijkt een halmaloos land . . .
Pema Pera: wel ja :)
--BELL--
Wester Kiranov: van die kleine cultuurdetails zijn dat, leuk

And then we decided it was time for the Being circle (or line).

Pema Pera: even alle gekheid op een stokje (zo zeg je dat, he?): wil jij dus beginnen?
Wester Kiranov: Ik begin wel. And I will switch to English, so the others can read it as well

Wester
Pema Pera: okay
Wester Kiranov: Somehow the Being as contrasted to doing or having does not seem important today.
Wester Kiranov: It's more that being is all that is left over when you stop all your everyday concerns
Wester Kiranov: But you could call it seeing, or noticing, or openness.
Wester Kiranov: Except that suggests someone who is seeing, or open.
Wester Kiranov: And ground suggests too much solidity, and sky too much out-there-ness
Pema Pera: :-)
Wester Kiranov: Strange, being does seem the the best way of saying it. What is, is possibly better, but it's even harder to fit it into conversation
Pema Pera: (^_^)
Wester Kiranov: Somehow, the only reason to use words, is to be able to see what is around the words. There is space, or room, around all words, and that might be the place to look
Wester Kiranov: I think that will do for now. Pema?
Pema Pera: thank you, Wester!

Pema
Pema Pera: the paradox of dropping (an unquestioned focus on) what we have is that we are left with something in-between
Pema Pera: I felt that keenly again today.
Pema Pera: if I drop by unquestioned belief in the reality and solidity of everything
Pema Pera: I am still left with whatever presents itself
Pema Pera: whatever appears
Pema Pera: yet I can't fall back on its existence or substantiality
Pema Pera: in short "nothing yet there"
Pema Pera: "no thing" yet appearance
Pema Pera: it's a kind of hanging in the air
--BELL--
Pema Pera: this sense of leaving things open is so hard to convey in words
Pema Pera: the move to postpone judgment
Pema Pera: neither denying the way that world and self *appear* nor buying into the meanings we normally immediately attach to those appearances . . . .
Pema Pera: I think I"ll stop here :)

And right at the moment we rounded off, Alfred appeared. We had a great conversation about not buying into frameworks, and other things.

Pema Pera: hi Alfred!
Wester Kiranov: Thank you Pema
Alfred Kelberry: pema-san :)
Wester Kiranov: Hi alf!
Alfred Kelberry: hi, wester
Alfred Kelberry: not too many people at this hour :)
Wester Kiranov: No, it's ususally quiet
Alfred Kelberry: how did you like a new addition to the pond, pema? :)
Pema Pera: looks nice, Alf, did you add it?
Alfred Kelberry: no, sophia did :)
Wester Kiranov: You came in just as we both finished our round of Tell us about Being. You can still have a go yourself, if you want to
Pema Pera: nice and peaceful
Alfred Kelberry: i just gave an idea after i saw this patch of grass
Alfred Kelberry: no, i'm fine, wester :)
Wester Kiranov: Good.
Pema Pera: Wester, have you tried to convey to others, in your own environment in RL, what it can mean to suspend judment?
Pema Pera: like not buying into the everyday picture of reality?
Wester Kiranov: Not really, no.
Wester Kiranov: My husband is somehow better at it than I am, and he totally resists any way to use techniques to improve it
Wester Kiranov: And I have introduced my sister to meditation
Pema Pera: better at what, Wester?
Wester Kiranov: Better at not buying into things
Wester Kiranov: If I find a new idea, and that includes Buddhism, and PaB, I totally immerse myself into it
Pema Pera: but does he buy into the picture of linear time and existence and such?
Wester Kiranov: Like it is The Answer
Wester Kiranov: and then later the skepticism kicks in
Pema Pera: :-)
Alfred Kelberry: pema, isn't "suspend judgment" is being tolerant in practical terms?
Wester Kiranov: I wouldn't know how to start explaining not buying into existence
Pema Pera: yes, Alfred, in some sense, but first you have to know how to be tolerant in that way
Pema Pera: the problem is that all of us have already bought into all kind of things that we are normally not aware of having bought into
Pema Pera: I'm sure that's the case for me too
Alfred Kelberry: yes, our network of habits
Pema Pera: and to uncover those is a very interesting exploration
Pema Pera: and far more radical than most people dream of . . .
Alfred Kelberry: we need some framework to exist in though :)
Pema Pera: not necessarily . . .
Pema Pera: or at least not necessarily in any heavy way
Wester Kiranov: Bit by bit you can uncover the unsolidity of the framework
Pema Pera: any expression "I/we need...." is itself an expression with respect to a given framework!!
Wester Kiranov: That's one thing I thought of - everything is as solid as it ever was, except it isn't solid at all
Pema Pera: YES!
Alfred Kelberry: yes, which is how i can tell that you're pema and next to you is wester :)
--BELL--
Pema Pera: yes, Wester, that is so central. We think that by letting go of one piece in our *understanding* of what the world is like, we somehow lose the world . . .
Pema Pera: that if our understanding of *solidity* changes, that somehow we can no longer be responsible, compassionate, etc . . .
Alfred Kelberry: can you give an example?
Pema Pera: one example is the current belief dat emotions are somehow defined by, given as, hormones
Pema Pera: and thoughts as brain currents
Pema Pera: as if that would make them more "real"
Pema Pera: so we even talk about "my brain is tired" -- as if we were talking about a tired muscle
Pema Pera: mixing all kind of metaphors
Pema Pera: but we can also take an emotion as it appears, as such
Pema Pera: without trying to reduce it to something else
Wester Kiranov: as if being totally defined makes them more real than if there is some space around the definitions
Pema Pera: let me give a very specific example in this area
Pema Pera: when my mother died, a long time ago, a well-meaning colleague of mine told me
Alfred Kelberry: wester, it makes them more comprehensible
Pema Pera: "science has recently discovered that the composition of your blood changes when you grieve"
Pema Pera: and with this he wanted to convey to me that it was okay to grieve, to be sad.
Pema Pera: I was so shocked, and my first reaction was: so until recently, people were not justified to grieve?
Wester Kiranov: (I know people who would react like that too)
Alfred Kelberry: he didn't say if this change is good or not
Pema Pera: humanity had to wait till 1983 or so until they were told that grieving is something real?
Pema Pera: of course, I did not say that to him
Pema Pera: I knew it was well intended
Pema Pera: but it was an example of how far reductionism can go . . . .
Alfred Kelberry: pema, i think you took it the wrong way. it's just a scientific study. it's not a justification of anything.
Pema Pera: Alfred, he wanted to console me, by telling me that it was not my fantasy, to grieve, but that it was real (as in "my blood changed")
Wester Kiranov: alf, definitions can make things more comprehensible withour our buying in them totally
Pema Pera: like "it's in your body, not your mind; and your body is real!"
Alfred Kelberry: :)
Alfred Kelberry: i don't see it being said in this way
Pema Pera: well, he clearly meant it that way
Alfred Kelberry: did you ask him?
Pema Pera: we talked about it, and yes, that's what he said
Pema Pera: explicitly
Alfred Kelberry: :)
Pema Pera: that I sholdn't feel bad about feeling sad
Pema Pera: that I shouldn't try to deny or change, since it was part of my physical reality
Pema Pera: "as we now know, based on recent studies"
Pema Pera: it is part of the extreme form of scientistm that many people have learned to buy into: everything is objectified completely and your own feelings only count if you can somehow cash them in or connect them with something seemingly objective
--BELL--
Alfred Kelberry: it's a rather wise approach in scientific community, i'd say
Pema Pera: oh sure
Alfred Kelberry: you don't want your numbers to be taken over by emotions
Pema Pera: it works, it's a good tool
Wester Kiranov: I am sorry, but I have to leave now. Thank you both for a lovely session
Wester Kiranov: namaste
Alfred Kelberry: bye, wester
Pema Pera: but you don't want to use one tool for everthing that you see, appropriate or not
Pema Pera: bye Wester!
Pema Pera: I have to go too, I see
Pema Pera: how an hour flies by quickly!
Alfred Kelberry: thank you for the company :)
Pema Pera: thank you too, Alfred!
Pema Pera: see you